2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The registration of ownership transfer as to Defendant B’s shares on February 1, 2005 in the name of Defendant B (hereinafter “instant shares”) is based on the ownership transfer agreement between the Plaintiff and the deceased F and the title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant B around January 2005, and the relevant title trust agreement is null and void as it is in violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name.

Therefore, with respect to the land indicated in the Attachment Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the Plaintiff filed a claim for registration of cancellation of the share transfer with Defendant CDA, the heir of the network F, in subrogation of Defendant B’s former registered titleholderF, and the Plaintiff’s heir of the networkF filed a claim for the registration of cancellation of the share transfer, and the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant CDA, the heir of the networkF, for the performance of each inheritance share transfer procedure under the agreement between the Plaintiff and the networkF on January 21, 2005.

B. However, Defendant B sold 1/3 shares of the land indicated in the separate sheet No. 4, which is the subject matter of the instant lawsuit, to the cooperative for the business of the common industrial complex, which sold in KRW 40,105,000, and thus, Defendant B became unable to perform the Defendants’ respective obligation

Therefore, Defendant B shall return the value of KRW 40,105,00 to the Plaintiff as damages or unjust enrichment, and the remainder of the Defendants shall compensate for the damages equivalent to the value of the land according to their respective inheritance shares.

2. The key issue of the instant case is whether there exists an agreement between the Plaintiff and the deceased F on the transfer of ownership and an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B on title trust.

However, without any direct evidence as to the ownership transfer agreement or the title trust agreement asserted by the Plaintiff or the Defendants, the Plaintiff’s assertion depends on memory (for a long time, it cannot be accurately recorded) and thus, the legitimacy of the Plaintiff’s assertion that has the burden of proof should be assessed only by indirect evidence.

It is argued that the Plaintiff is keeping the registration-related documents, such as the certificate of completion of registration, as well as the Defendants are the representatives of G type.